Archive for the 'police misconduct' Category

Got That, Punks?

Wednesday, February 25th, 2009

A police officer in the Chesapeake area addresses the Ryan Frederick case on his blog:

Ryan Frederick will forever be known as a cop killer. He shot and killed Detective Jerrod Shivers in January 2008 while the Chesapeake Police Department was serving a search warrant at his house. He is a cold blooded killer…

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury? You have FAILED MISERABLY. You have failed the family of Detective Shivers, police officers, the City of Chesapeake, Commonwealth of Virginia and this nation. Failed. Failures each and every one of you.

The next time you need police, please be sure to tell them you were on the Frederick jury. While that is an emotional statement, I do know that no matter what, the officers will still be professional. But I bet it made you stop and think didn’t it?

Just like all the people who have voted in the polls on PilotOnline. Voting for acquittal. The next time YOU need police, be sure to tell them you think that Frederick should have been let off for killing a cop.

Classy.

New Professionalism Roundup

Monday, February 9th, 2009
  • Normally, I’d stick up for people whose names were publicized on mere allegations of impropriety. But given that this is the same city that seizes the cars of suspected Johns before they’re ever convicted, I find it hard to conjure up much sympathy when the names of cops suspected of racial profiling get leaked to the public.
  • NOPD is an absolute mess.
  • Police in Salinas, California open fire on an unarmed couple after apparently mistaking a wallet for a gun during a routine traffic stop.
  • Memphis cop convicted of shaking down drug dealers to fund his dream of opening a record company. He had plenty of help within the department.
  • Former sheriff convicted of using his authority to commit sexual assault. The most amazing comment comes from the U.S. attorney prosecuting him, who according to the article said, “he did not oppose Keating’s remaining free until the sentencing because this crime and other alleged misdeeds happened when he was acting as the sheriff.” Got that? He should get leniency because he used to be the sheriff.
  • I’ll just quote Jonathan Turley’s headline: “Police officer drives after drinking, crashes into fountain, flees the scene of an accident, abandons car with gun inside, and then lies to police . . . and is charged with criminal damage.”

  • One of the Cops That Jumped Dymond Milburn Named 2008 Galveston “Officer of the Year”

    Monday, December 22nd, 2008

    Congrats, Officer Sean Stewart. You are the latest embodiment of Justice Antonin Scalia’s “new police professionalism” in action.

    See here (pdf), page five.

    Prior posts on Milburn’s lawuit here and here.

    Credit to commenter CharlesWT for the find.

    More on Dymond Milburn

    Thursday, December 18th, 2008

    So there’s been quite a bit of discusion around the Internet on the Dymond Milburn case since I posted on this Houston Press story this afternoon.  I guess if you aren’t used to these sorts of stories, it can seem a little implausible.  Which is why more than a few commenters at various sites have raised the possibility that the whole thing is a hoax.  If it is, it’s quite a hoax.  Like, on a Tawana Brawley scale.

    So let’s clarify some misconceptions…

    It’s all a hoax.

    The lawsuit is very real. It was filed in August of this year.  Here’s a write-up from the Courthouse News Service from the day it was filed.  Here’s a copy (pdf) of the complaint.  If this is a hoax, Milburn, her family, and her attorney are going to great lengths to pull it off. Yes, her complaint likely paints what happened in a light quite favorable to her, and unfavorable to the police.  But I’d be very surprised if the major components of the complaint weren’t true.

    This happened two years ago.  Why are you posting about it now?

    The incident happened in August 2006.  The lawsuit was filed in August of this year.  Milburn’s attorney tipped off Houston Press reporter Chris Vogel, who wrote about the case yesterday.  I saw Vogel’s story, and blogged about the case today.

    This is just one version of events, from Milburn’s lawyer.

    Yes, and I made that clear in the post.  After I put up the post and talked to Vogel on the phone, he posted a response from the police officers’ lawyer, William Helfand.  You can read that here.

    Here’s what isn’t in dispute:  Milburn was wrongly targeted during a prostitution raid.  The police were looking for white prostitutes.  Milburn is black.  She was apprehended by plain-clothes narcotics officers who emerged from a van as she stood outside her home.  She resisted.  The police have acknowledged they targeted the wrong house.  Three weeks later, Milburn was arrested at  her school, in front of her classmates, for “assaulting a public official.”  At some point, her father was arrested on a similar charge.  The judge declared a mistrial on the first day of Milburn’s trial.  According to Vogel, she’s scheduled to be tried again in February.

    Milburn and her family are now suing the police officers who apprehended her.  They claim she was severely beaten during the raid.  According to the compliant, two hours after the raid, Milburn’s parents took her to a hospital, where doctors documented a host of nasty injuries.  I haven’t seen documentation of the hospital stay or the injuries, but if that’s all included in the complaint, I would assume it exists.

    I called the Galveston police department and the Galveston district attorney’s office for comment.  I haven’t yet heard back from either.

    Milburn has profiles on social networking sites that say she’s 17.  That means she would have been 15 at the time of the raid, not 12.

    I’m not linking to a minor’s social networking page, particularly a minor who may have been the victim of abuse.  She doesn’t need a bunch of crazies trying to contact her.  Use Google, or check the comments if you’re interested, but yes, she does state in one of her profiles that she’s 17. My guess is that Milburn exaggerated her age, as teenage girls sometimes do on the Internet.  This high school track and field results page, found by a commenter, says she was born in 1993.  If her birthday falls later in the year than August, she would have been 12 at the time of the raid, as indicated in the complaint.

    If it’s true, why hasn’t an outrageous story like this been picked up by the national media?

    Why don’t 90 percent of the abuses of power we look at on this site get covered by the national media?  The lawsuit was filed in August of an election year.  A single instance of police misconduct in Galveston at that time would have quite a few other stories to compete with.  As to why the story wasn’t covered in 2006, Vogel tells me the raid took place in a low-income neighborhood.  I would guess that after a traumatic experience like that, and after the seemingly retributive arrest, the family was either too frightened to take their story to the media, or couldn’t get anyone to listen when they did.

    I’ll post more information on this case as I learn of it.

    Ryan Frederick Update

    Tuesday, December 16th, 2008

    Lots of interesting new information came out at a pre-trial hearing yesterday in Chesapeake, Virginia for Ryan Frederick, the man charged with capital murder for killing Det. Jarrod Shivers during a botched drug raid on Frederick’s home last January.

    To briefly catch you up: Police were acting on an informant’s tip that Frederick was growing marijuana in his garage.  They found no plants, and only a misdemeanor amount of marijuana, which Frederick concedes was for personal use.  Both I and the Virginian-Pilot newspaper have since reported that the informant in the case, “Steven,” and another man who also says he was a police informant, Renaldo Turnbull, illegally broke into Frederick’s home three nights before the raid to look for probably cause, likely with the consent or at least the knowledge of the police.

    Here’s what we learned yesterday:

    • The State is now conceding that the police informant in the case illegally broke into Frederick’s home three nights before the raid.  Until now, they had either denied the connection or refused to comment.

    • Frederick’s attorney released an audio recording taken in a police car shortly after the raid.  In it, Frederick tries to explain that he was confused and frightened because someone had broken into his home earlier in the week.  A police detective replies, “We know that.”  In a second recording, the detective says again, “First off, we know your house had been broken into. OK?”

    • Yet according to the Virginian-Pilot, the State still insists that, “there is nothing whatsoever to suggest police knew at the time who broke in or who was involved. They said police learned months later that the parties involved included one of their informants.” (Emphasis mine.)

    This doesn’t make any sense.  The affidavit the police filed to obtain the warrant notes that the police informant was in Frederick’s home three nights before the raid.  That’s exactly when the burglary happened.  The State is trying to argue that even though (a) the police knew their informant was in Frederick’s house three nights before the raid, and (b) the police knew someone had broken into Frederick’s home three nights before the raid, they apparently believed at the time that these two incidents were entirely coincidental, which is why they didn’t include on the search warrant affidavit the fact that their informant illegally broke into Frederick’s home to obtain probable cause.

    There are two options here.  The Chesapeake police are either corrupt, or they’re naive to the point of incompetent.  The State apparently believes its case is better served by arguing the latter.

    But there’s one other niggling detail that throws the State’s argument into a tailspin: Ryan Frederick never reported the break-in.  How, then, could the detective who questioned Frederick the night of the raid have known about it?

    • Despite all of this, Judge Marjorie A.T. Arrington still denied a defense motion to suppress the warrant.  Which if nothing else I guess gives Frederick an early issue to put in his appeal should he be convicted.

    • There’s now more than enough evidence to suggest that Chesapeake police had knowledge that the probable cause for the search warrant to Frederick’s home was obtained illegally.  Moreover, Turnbull’s interviews with me and with the Virginian-Pilot also raise the possibility that this wasn’t the first time a Chesapeake police informant burglarized a private residence to search for probable cause.  According to Turnbull, this was common practice.  And the police encouraged it.

    It’s past time for an outside investigation, preferably from the Justice Department.

    • Special Prosecutor Paul Ebert subpoenaed Virginian-Pilot reporter John Hopkins, the other journalist to speak to Turnbull. Ebert never called Hopkins to the stand. But the possibility that he could have caused Judge Arrington to bar Hopkins from the courtroom.  Hopkins—who has covered this case as well as I’ve seen any journalist cover one of these raids—now won’t be able to attend next month’s trial, either.

    • The plants the informant Steven claimed to have found in Frederick’s home were never turned over to the police, and thus were never tested to confirm that they were actually marijuana. For all we know, they could still have been Japanese Maple saplings. Turnbull says Steven turned the plants over to the police.  The State is either arguing that the police didn’t know Turnbull and Steven removed the plants, or that they were aware, but never got around to asking Steven to turn them over.  Again, the choice here is corruption or incompetence.

    That also means that this entire raid was conducted solely on the word of the informant Steven, a shady character who at the time was facing his own criminal charges for credit card fraud.  There were no controlled buys, and no significant surveillance.  The only corroborating investigation the police did were a few drive-bys of Frederick’s home. According to the affidavit, that should have lessened their suspicion, because they noted no unusual activity.

    Prior posts on the Frederick case here.

    UPDATE: Chesapeake-area blogger Rick Caldwell writes:

    Ryan Frederick is being harassed by the city of Chesapeake, through code enforcement. His sister has recently moved back to the area, having lived overseas for several years. Since her arrival, she has received numerous notices from the city’s code enforcement division, regarding siding in disrepair, the condition of the pool in the back yard, and demanding the removal of two signs expressing support for Ryan from the front yard. The city has been sending these notices to Ryan at the jail as well, and is even threatening to sue over the pool.

    Nice touch.

    Puppycide in Oklahoma

    Thursday, October 23rd, 2008

    The New Professionalism

    Tuesday, August 12th, 2008

    So the guy in the video below had two teeth chipped when, as you’ll see, the cop grabs him by the hair and slams his head into the pavement. After you watch, see if the tape jibes with the sworn testimony the police officers gave in court:

    Before the Denver detectives knew about the videotape, they wrote reports and were deposed in court about what happened. Both officers said Heaney was throwing “wild punches” at them, hit the officers in the face and chest and continued to attack them, even when they had him on the ground.

    Under oath, Cordova and Costigan also denied knowing anything about Heaney’s broken teeth.

    Heaney’s attorney Lonn Heymann asked Cordova in court, “Was there a point at which somebody slammed his face into the ground?”

    Cordova answered, “Absolutely not.”

    “How did Mr. Heaney’s front teeth get broken,” asked Heymann.

    Cordova replied, “I have not a clue.”

    The internal police investigation couldn’t find a single witness to the incident. The TV station found three. I can see at least that many in the video.

    The Denver Police Department said Monday it is conducting an internal investigation of the arrest.

    “The investigation is underway, and no conclusions should be drawn until all of the facts are available and the totality of the circumstances can be considered,” said Division Chief of Investigations Dave Fisher. “Everyone in our country is initially entitled to a presumption of innocence, even police officers.”

    True. It’s just too bad the cops didn’t show a lick of respect for Cordova’s rights.

    Oh, and after the beating, Heaney was charged with second-degree assault on a police officer and “criminal mischief” for allegedly breaking one of the officer’s sunglasses. Those charges have now been dropped. But not for the video, he’d likely have been convicted.

    Afternoon Links

    Monday, July 28th, 2008
  • Locksmiths vs. the Intertubes.
  • Are frequent flier miles still worth the effort?
  • Alternet recounts 20 years of torture by Chicago police officers, and the dozens of men who may still in prison due to false forced confessions.
  • Drug raid leads to puppycide. No drugs found.
  • Is the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation profiting from smoking bans?
  • Meghan McCain: Islamofascist sympathizer?

  • St. Louis Cops Turn Forfeiture Policy Into Free Car Rental Service

    Monday, July 21st, 2008

    Seems that the city of St. Louis, like many cities, allows the police to confiscate the cars of people suspected (but not necessarily convicted) of certain crimes. They have a contract with a city towing firm, and said firm was allowing police officers and their families to "rent" confiscated cars free of charge, sometimes for months on end. Officers and their families could also sometimes purchase the confiscated cars at a fraction of the cars’ value.

    All of that is pretty outrageous. But it gets better.  The St. Louis Post-Dispatch stumbled onto the story after investigating the daughter of the city’s police chief. She had been involved in a number of accidents with different cars. On several occasions she had wrecked a car, then simply gone down to the towing service to get a 60-80 percent discount on a new one. After one accident, her blood-alcohol concentration tested at .17. She wasn’t arrested or charged. The department says it has "no idea" why she was let go.

    The police department hired a law firm, which concluded that the towing arrangement broke no rules or laws. The chief improbably claims he was oblivious to the deals his daughter was getting (her relationship with the towing service apparently goes back to 2002). The Post-Dispatch reports that the chief’s last public statement on the matter was that, "the absolute necessity in maintaining transparency in the eyes of the public."

    He has since declined to comment.

    (Via TheNewspaper.com)

    “Professional Courtesy” and DWI

    Tuesday, July 8th, 2008

    Earlier this week, I posted on a DUI case in Mesa, Arizona where a police officer oddly saw signs of drunkenness in a woman whose blood-alcohol concentration came back .00.

    Now out of San Jose, California
    comes a story about a well-connected former police officer who, apparently flat-out knockered, rear-ended an Escalade, which then flipped the median and struck an oncoming Jetta.

    The ex-cop’s name is Sandra Woodall. We only know that thanks to the San Jose Mercury News. The police department wouldn’t release her name. Woodall now works as an investigator for the Santa Clara district attorney’s office. Her husband is a sergeant with the local police department. And her father-in-law was formerly a lieutenant at the same department. He’s also now an investigator for the district attorney’s office.

    Unlike the case in Mesa, where a police officer reported he could smell booze on the breath of a woman who hadn’t been drinking, the cops in San Jose pointedly couldn’t smell liquor on the breath a former cop who was so drunk, she couldn’t remember what year it was.

    Newly obtained court documents show there was ample evidence a former San Jose police officer was drunk when she crashed her SUV in March, but police chose not to question her about alcohol use or test her blood.

    Soon after Sandra Woodall’s March 25 multi-car accident, she told paramedics that she was just out of rehab, had consumed “a lot” of alcohol and was so disoriented that she thought it was 2006, according to documents. Both of the paramedics who treated Woodall noted the strong smell of alcohol on her breath.

    Sgt. Will Manion - a well-regarded senior officer who was the police supervisor on the scene - noted none of these things. Instead, Manion seemed to EMTs to be coaching Woodall on the correct way to answer their questions. He later tried to prevent them from taking her to a hospital, an EMT alleged. Manion insisted that he had no evidence she was drunk, and was trying to determine whether she could be forced to go to the hospital against her will.

    But instead of exploring the possibility that Woodall was intoxicated, officers at the scene concluded that the speeding accident could have been caused because Woodall was eating egg rolls from Jack in the Box while she was driving. They decided not even to cite her for speeding - an unusual conclusion in so dramatic an accident.

    The police didn’t give Woodall a field sobriety test. They didn’t ask her to take a breath test. And they didn’t take her blood.

    Woodall has now finally been charged with felony drunk driving, though no thanks to the investigating officers. It took an outraged phone call to senior police officials from one of the people Woodall hit to get a proper investigation.

    I’m sure Woodall will lose her job with the DA’s office. The real question is whether the officers who covered up for her will lose their jobs, too.

    Oh, and this certainly isn’t the first time police officers have been caught letting fellow officers off the hook for DWI.

    Thanks to Dan G. for the tip.